Questions that bother us include:
What is the significant difference between blaming the universe on God and blaming it on a Big Bang? Seems to us, only the name has changed …
What is the difference between blaming life on God and blaming it upon Evolution? Again, said difference seems to us, to rest upon a name.
In both cases, the assertion that God cannot be involved remains unproven with another name replacing His unexplained.
Put simply, it smacks of a coon job, we think. For religious folk, God is also unexplained, a matter f faith. Replacing Him seems merely a variation on the same process. “A rose, by any other name, …”
We wonder too, how human voters can continue hoping for relief of the universe-imposed human condition via electing politicians of any stripe. Millennia of human history have demonstrated the fallacy of that proposition; it amounts to putting the wolves in charge of the sheepfold, as the ancient Roman: “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes” clarified a couple thousand years back. Translation: “Who will govern the governors?” for this go around. Readers may notice that this has come up before. (With no one answering the question.)
America’s Founders made this a centerpiece, the reason their Constitution provided so limited and impecunious a government.Why have we emasculated all of their protections?
We suppose, because it is our nature to do so. In ancient Scripture, the Israelites first act when Moses left them to run up the mountain to fetch the Ten Commandments, was to abandon all of his instructions and to immediately — well, over a month or so — revert to paganism and the accompanying license to do as they pleased, rather than as Moses told them God had instructed. Paganism was apparently a lot more fun. (Though from subsequent experience, likely less productive.)
The thing is, in all of the thousands of years since, our species has been repeating that cycle, over and over. The post-Roman, very Christian West suffered its Reformation or Protestant Revolt as you perfer, over a similar pattern when too much of European Christianity had embraced too much human corruption. If you consider it, deja Moses all over again.
It seems to be what we do. We yell for God, agreeing to do as He says when we are suffering; only to abandon the annoying restrictions when things get better. Some religious folk see this as Original Sin, damning us. Others see it as a function of our DNA, designed in so that we can combine a strong self-preservation drive with a strong social drive, both being needed for our species to survive. You choice. Again it seems to us mostly a difference of viewpoint.
It’s notable that, after the social freedoms of the “Roaring 20’s”in California at least, an unmmistakable swing from loose and corrupt behavior toward a rather strict rectitude accompanied the progress of the resulting Great Depression. A famously corrupt Los Angeles city administration was replaces by a spectacularly honest one for a considerable time and the pattern also affected the State.
Perhaps a coincidence, we don’t know. Or perhaps a routine human cycle completing itself? Quien sabe?
Just more that we don’t know. We do note though, that across the globe, the more corrupt a place, the poorer and less peaceful it is likely to be. (Search: “Corruption world map.”) And we note rising corruption in the United States and Europe that were once called: “Christendom.” Maybe more Christian behavior has something to do with wealth and progress? We don’t know that, either but it seems reasonable.
Our last unanswered question: If corruption brings poverty and unrest, what is n store for what has been the most advanced part of the planet?
We don’t know that, either, but we will admit that it worries us.